Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
ALBISTA: Jurnal Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat
All manuscripts submitted to ALBISTA: Jurnal Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process to promote objectivity, fairness, and academic integrity.
Review Policy
Each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editorial team to determine its relevance to the journal's focus and scope, compliance with the Author Guidelines, originality, academic quality, and completeness of submission requirements.
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening will normally be assigned to at least two independent reviewers who have expertise relevant to the topic of the manuscript.
Review Stages
Authors submit manuscripts through the ALBISTA online submission system and ensure that all required metadata and supporting information are complete.
The editorial team checks the manuscript for compliance with the journal's focus and scope, article template, ethical requirements, originality, manuscript structure, and technical formatting. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements may be returned to the authors or rejected without external review.
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two reviewers based on their expertise, academic competence, and relevance to the manuscript topic.
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript independently. Authors' identities are not disclosed to reviewers, and reviewers' identities are not disclosed to authors.
Reviewers assess the relevance of the community problem, clarity of objectives, appropriateness of the implementation method, quality of results and discussion, evidence of community impact, originality, use of relevant references, and overall contribution of the manuscript.
Reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:
- Accept Submission;
- Revisions Required;
- Resubmit for Review;
- Decline Submission.
When revisions are required, authors must respond carefully to the reviewers' comments and revise the manuscript accordingly. Authors may be requested to provide a response explaining the changes made.
The Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor considers the reviewers' recommendations, the authors' revisions, and the overall quality of the manuscript before making the final editorial decision.
Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout, proofreading, and publication. Authors may be asked to review the final proof before publication.
Review Criteria
Reviewers are expected to consider the following aspects:
- Relevance to the focus and scope of ALBISTA;
- Clarity and significance of the community problem;
- Appropriateness of the community service method or approach;
- Quality and clarity of results and discussion;
- Evidence of benefits, outcomes, or community impact;
- Originality and contribution of the program;
- Use of relevant and recent scholarly literature;
- Clarity of tables, figures, and documentation;
- Quality of academic writing;
- Compliance with publication ethics.
Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest
Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents and must not disclose, distribute, or use unpublished information contained in the manuscript for personal benefit.
Reviewers should decline a review assignment when they have a conflict of interest that may affect the objectivity of their assessment.
Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of a manuscript remains the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial team of ALBISTA.
Jurnal Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat
